EVENTS

I’m not going to do any porn, either

And with that declaration, the universe heaves a vasty sigh of relief. I’m not interested, no one else would be interested, and I don’t think I’d be particularly good at it. Also, it’s the kind of behavior, along with selling illegal narcotics, pursuing a hobby of running a white slavery ring, or getting caught barbecuing babies that would move my university to revoke my tenure.

And that’s not right. If I were a sexually talented exhibitionist, why shouldn’t I be perfectly within my rights to have an avocation of filming consensual, legal activities? We have a rather puritanical attitude towards sex, and that means that we punish people for doing something that almost everyone does all the time. While I’m no more going to flaunt my sexual behavior publicly than I’m going to take up gymnastics as a hobby (and all of you, quit cheering every time I promise not to ever do porn), I can see where some people might enjoy it… like Greta Christina, who regrets that social mores mean she can’t both do porn and be a respected spokesperson for atheism.

I’m curious: can anyone give a good rational reason why performing in pornography should diminish one’s credibility in the public eye? Is it a more morally reprehensible line of work than, say, investment banker or Fox News host?

Another question: which do you think the general public would find a greater handicap to electability to government office, a career in porn, or a career as an atheist?

Comments

It seems to me that if you’re going to have a healthy attitude towards sex, you have to recognize that there are fluids from both partners involved: it’s not dry, it’s not plastic. Different people are going to take different approaches to the messiness, either by reveling in it and making it part of the fun, or by being prepared with towels to clean up as it happens. It’s all good. All that matters is what the people involved enjoy.

The only problem I see here is that porn tends to promote a male-centric and narrow view of what is the ‘right’ way to have sex. I haven’t seen much porn, but the few examples I have seen always seem to end with the man masturbating until he ejaculates onto the woman’s face or into her open mouth…and I have never done that, nor do I find it a particularly appealing way to finish. Somebody likes it that way, fine; but I’ve always figured my tastes are pretty vanilla (don’t we all?), and it’s just odd that porn has such a formulaic pattern, and it’s not mine.

In fact, porn is just weird all around. Real sex never works like that, nor is it a pattern to aspire to.

And it was Tethys’ ex who likened them to marking territory. I was remarking on the comparison, not making it.

I think you mistook my meaning. My thanks were sincere. I thought you made a good point: a blanket assessment of all women who enjoy getting cum on their faces as being like dogs who are being degraded is far more degrading than the act itself.

I don’t enjoy watching them in porn videos either; the only time I actually LIKE it is with this one specific partner who really likes them; since it makes him happy, I agreed to try it and lo and behold! it’s actually kinda fun. But the thing is, I’m looking at HIS face, not mine–that’s the turn-on. In pornos they rarely show the guy’s face, only his cock–and that’s just boring to me.

Been lurking and watching (because every time I’m going to say something, I refresh and the point’s already been addressed, or the conversation’s moved on, or Infinite123 has already left — damn, but the Horde can talk!), but I thought I’d just say in response to this

Somebody likes it that way, fine; but I’ve always figured my tastes are pretty vanilla (don’t we all?), and it’s just odd that porn has such a formulaic pattern, and it’s not mine.

In fact, porn is just weird all around. Real sex never works like that, nor is it a pattern to aspire to.

Some years back at college, I made a comparison of sex and food, with porn being like ramen: yea, it gets the job done, but that doesn’t mean it’s all that great or satisfying.

People who think “vajayjay” is somehow better reminds me of all the ridiculous parents out there who make up euphemisms for their daughters “naughty bits” or teach them to refer to their vagina as butterfly or flower.

Eww. I’ve heard “woo-woo” as an example of what to avoid. I explained to my daughter that what were between her legs were “girl parts” (and later taught her the complementary term “boy parts” without elaborating when she walked in on me changing and gleefully announced “DADDY’S GIRL PARTS!”). Since then, someone (probably either one of her ABA providers or a teacher) seems to have taken exception and told her to refer to it as “that area.” Which is on a comparable level of clarity, to my frustration. I don’t want her being taught to be ashamed or evasive… :/

Also, the advice about “spooge” is well taken. I could add a few more… >.>

As for the facial/cumshot idea, I’ve never particularly thought of them as “humiliating” and am kind of mystified by people who assume they must be – to me the connotations would be of intentional immersiveness and visceral enjoyment – “diving in,” so to speak. I suppose that could have as much to do with the gimmicks of the sites where I first encountered them, as a ~13 year old, as anything else, though.

Since then, someone (probably either one of her ABA providers or a teacher) seems to have taken exception and told her to refer to it as “that area.”

FFS. I’d try to correct that as soon as possible, if it’s feasible to do so*. “That area” sounds repressive and shameful. I don’t know how old your daughter is or her specific situation, but I’ve found that most kids, even very young ones, have no problems with the correct names for all the body bits. It’s generally adults who have the problem. (Which I’m sure you know.)

*Not only with your daughter, but if you ever find out who decided to take exception, I’d have a serious chat with them.

I don’t think we ever used euphemisms with either daughter- or sonspawn. We did luck out with a whole TV series a while back, when they were just into their teens – I think it was on Channel 4 (UK) – all about how (mainstream, commercial) porn gives young people unrealistic ideas about what sex and the shapes and responses of their own bodies “should” be like, etc. We watched it all together over dinner and talked about it afterwards, which was quite fun (the kids thought it was hilarious when I blushed while telling them that involving food (such as strawberries and cream) does not always go according to plan).

Eww. I’ve heard “woo-woo” as an example of what to avoid. I explained to my daughter that what were between her legs were “girl parts” (and later taught her the complementary term “boy parts” without elaborating when she walked in on me changing and gleefully announced “DADDY’S GIRL PARTS!”).

We simply went for penis and vagina (German equivalent thereof, which is the literal translation of vagina. Talk about sexism being in our language).
We try to be as open and unashamed about our bodies as possible, but I know that my husband gets a bit uncomfortable with the girls’ unashamed interest in his penis and their attempts to play with it. So that’s the point to teach them about consent and not wanting to be touched in certain ways.
They are usually a bit puzzled by the idea of parents being people of their own ;)

Talking about cum shots:
As with most things in sexuality, I think the question isn’t so much what but why.
Doing a face shot because that’s what really, really gives you pleasure and your partner being OK with it: good.
Demanding your partner to take it because that’s how you mark your property: fuck off.
That whole media thing about how sex works (not only porn, but also the rest of it) is completely fucked up anyway and makes people unhappy, because they never get the satisfaction out of it they’re supposed to get because X is the thing to do and if you don’t you don’t know how to have sex and are probably a prude virgin.

The world’s foremost authority on ailments down south, Lazoff led a team of cutting-edge hoo-ha doctors to develop new strategies for detecting abnormal growth in…you know, that area. The accomplished physician humbly accepted medicine’s highest honor before a crowd of her peers, and spoke about the importance of regular screenings to prevent unnecessary complications up inside one’s business.

So now we’re talking about how fun cumshots are? Well, thanks for acknowledging that the pornographic elements in that supposedly feminist porn aren’t all that different from the mainstream industry after all.

Tethys said the main difference was “that sex is depicted as a mutually pleasurable activity.” So the degrading stuff doesn’t matter; if the woman in the film finds being degraded pleasurable, then degrading porn is okay.

PZ, of course it’s weird. There’s no interaction in porn, no communication; instead of making it, you’re having delivered to you, like a thing. That’s what makes it weird even if the act filmed was realistic and not degrading. For this reason I think porn as a concept is inherently objectifying even in the few cases where the actual contents are not degrading (since the people involved become means to deliver sex to the viewer), as is prostitution, while sex (one night stands included) is quite the opposite.

Tethys said the main difference was “that sex is depicted as a mutually pleasurable activity.” So the degrading stuff doesn’t matter; if the woman in the film finds being degraded pleasurable, then degrading porn is okay.

No, jose, what is important is pleasure and consent.
If the woman in question enjoys and wants the cum shot, it is not degrading.
But you know what is degrading?
Telling women what they can and cannot like because if they do they become part of the bad.
Tying somebody up isn’t degrading if that is what the person likes. Holding somebody on a leash and telling them to lick your boots isn’t degrading if that is what that person wants to do.
I don’t like porn, I don’t like cum shots. I actually like cum best when it’s inside of a condom.
But I’m not going around telling people that they have to do it like that.

1. My porn name is “Antiochus Epiphanes”. Lol
2. I find that the use of technical anatomical words for genitalia is stiltedly clinical, in a way that would seem affected were it used when discussing other body parts.
“I come from Alabama with a banjo on my patella” etcetera.

The fact that we have no vernacular words for such parts*, like “knee” or “elbow” or “neck”, forces us to use either euphemisms or technical terms. If one is referring to a general structure, “scrotum” and “vulva” seem fine enough. However, to refer to one’s own equipment with those words removes any of the connotations of comfort, interest, or ….I guess fun, …that we sometimes may wish to…you know. Convey. Maybe sometimes one wants to avoid connotation, but often one doesn’t. And what we are left with, vocabulary wise, is euphemism which is rich with connotation.

I think that our some of best literary traditions illustrate this conundrum beautifully.

Maude Lebowski: In a sense, yes. My art has been commended as being strongly vaginal which bothers some men. The word itself makes some men uncomfortable. Vagina.
The Dude: Oh yeah?
Maude Lebowski: Yes, they don’t like hearing it and find it difficult to say whereas without batting an eye a man will refer to his dick or his rod or his Johnson.
The Dude: Johnson?

The discomfort the Dude might have felt (were he given to that sort of thing), may have more to do with the clinical nature of the term “vaginal” than the fact that it is a female structure.

Wow, cultural relativism. Slavery isn’t degrading if the slave is happy. Untouchables in India are just fine if they don’t stop and think too much about their place in society. If I think something is okay, then it’s okay.

Nope, sorry. Practices and customs can be analyzed independently of what the people involved think. For example: women in porn in schoolgirl uniforms, with ponytails and being spanked by the man for being a naughty girl. Regardless of what the woman might think, the scene is reducing a woman to little girl status and because of that it’s degrading to her, even if she loves it.

Notice I’m not telling anyone what they should like. In my first comment I said: “While I don’t share, understand or support your choice of becoming an object temporarily for some stranger’s enjoyment, I only am entitled to my own choices, not others’, so whatever floats your boat is okay.”

To each his/her own; it takes all sorts to make a world; whatever works for you, etc. There’s a difference between giving my opinion on a practice and wanting to dictate what people do in their private life. I hope the difference is clear enough.

So I’m not going around telling people that they have to do it like that, either.

For example: women in porn in schoolgirl uniforms, with ponytails and being spanked by the man for being a naughty girl. Regardless of what the woman might think, the scene is reducing a woman to little girl status and because of that it’s degrading to her, even if she loves it.

Notice I’m not telling anyone what they should like.- jose

Yes, you are. Again and again and again. But… whatever floats your boat is OK!

So now we’re talking about how fun cumshots are? Well, thanks for acknowledging that the pornographic elements in that supposedly feminist porn aren’t all that different from the mainstream industry after all.

The difference was explained to you. It’s not our fault you aren’t intellectually honest enough to acknowledge it.

Nah, Jose just thinks we women are so oppressed by the patriarchy that we can’t meaningfully consent to being in porn. I’m curious why he thinks we can consent to sex, then? Is is a Magical Oppression Camera? Or maybe we can only consent to sex that he, personally, doesn’t think is degrading.

So I’ll make sure to check in with him before I see my boyfriend again, just to make sure I’m not being degraded. Not that jose’s telling me what to do or anything… it’s just that otherwise I’m a tool of the patriarchy.

My position on feminism is most pertinent: Sarah Palin is a feminist because she says she is and I think she’s being sincere in her understanding.

So, basically, you simply take anyone’s word about what their actual beliefs are.

Except me.

Glad we cleared that up.

What?

Again: “If I’ve called generally pro-porn self-identified feminists “anti-feminist” in the past, then I was wrong to do so. I have a pretty good memory for this, and I’m fairly sure I haven’t, but it is possible and I’m willing to attempt to account for any quotes that seem borderline.”

That applies even to my enemies, Azkyroth.

Have I called you anti-feminist? I think I haven’t, but:

Do you have a quote of me describing you as anti-feminist? I will be happy to reexamine my error and retract it.

Are you just pretty sure I have called you anti-feminist, but you can’t find the quote? If so, I apologize without reservation for making this impression. I do not believe you are anti-feminist.

So, basically, you simply take anyone’s word about what their actual beliefs are.

And for accuracy, no, this is not what I do. As I just indicated, I use whatever available heuristics to gauge whether I think they are sincere in their understanding. You know, like anyone else does when presented with a self-identification that is not unequivocally verifiable.

I don’t see what’s objectionable about this, or deserving of your dismissive wording. Do you, for example, have some argument to show that Sarah Palin is not sincere in her self-identification or understanding of feminism? Would you instead argue that she is apparently sincere in her self-identification and understanding of feminism but this is insufficient to accept her self-identification as true?

> For this reason I think porn as a concept is inherently objectifying even in the few cases where the actual contents are not degrading (since the people involved become means to deliver sex to the viewer) <

–Once again, I bring you case #2569: GAY PORN (which is a substantial portion of the pornography industry and involves people of the same sex indulging in–many, many, many times–consensual sexual activities).
The "few cases"…really? There are more than a "few cases" where the contents of porn are not degrading. I'd like to see some proof of this claim you're making here. Heck, to say something like that, I figure you've either seen the vast majority of porn out there (which would probably result in never leaving the bed) or you've done a massive amount of online research. I'm sure you're not making a massive generalization based on your own biases.

Well, there’s nothing all that special about it. It’s just that it’s probably the place we lived the longest before the divorce. And it was our last move across state lines, so for the next 15 years I lived within a few miles of it. In fact, for much of that, I lived two blocks away. So I do remember that house.

It was kinda weird, though, when a friend of mine moved into it a few years back. Being back inside after all those years, it didn’t seem like the same place at all. Barely recognized it from inside.

So, I guess if I use a modified porn name of first pet I can remember and first street I can remember, I’m Smoky Clayton.

It is entirely possible that you’ve never used that specific phrase, though you’ve berated me in terms that drew a linguistic distinction between me and “feminists” on multiple occasions. But it goes beyond the epithet of “anti-feminist,” and there’s nothing about my phrasing that would suggest it being confined to that, and you know it. You have repeatedly used language that attributes motives or beliefs to me (usually motives that could be reasonably characterized as “anti-feminist” whether or not that specific term was used), and instead of doing the intellectually honest thing and either correcting yourself or providing some substantive evidence for my denial being insincere, you simply continued to use the same language. In spite of this and a habit of responding to caricatured strawmen of my actual positions (and you pretty much admitted, upthread, that you’re looking to have the argument YOU want to have, not address what I actually write), you have objected vigorously to the charge of “misrepresenting my positions” and demanded I produce specific examples, which would mean spending a long time hunting through old comment threads for exchanges that I would frankly rather just forget about (and when I have done this, you’ve engaged in some truly impressive hair-splitting and equivocation to handwave my examples away – the term “gaslighting” is springing to mind all of a sudden). This shows me that you’re either so completely wrapped up in confirmation bias and a sort of righteous entitlement that you’ve developed an emotionally abusive one-sided relationship of convenience with reality, and thus engaging with you is pointless, or you’re a self-aware bullying troll…in which case engaging with you is still pointless.

I don’t intend to do so further, but I’m not going to make (another) promise not to, since you’ve proven willing to do things like jump into conversations on other threads purporting to “warn” people about me (whether or not that specific phrasing was used) that are sufficiently triggering that I’m not really able to let them slide.

You have repeatedly used language that attributes motives or beliefs to me (usually motives that could be reasonably characterized as “anti-feminist” whether or not that specific term was used), and after I explained that I did not in fact have those motives or beliefs, instead of doing the intellectually honest thing and either correcting yourself or providing some substantive evidence for my denial being insincere, you simply continued to use the same language.

It is entirely possible that you’ve never used that specific phrase, though you’ve berated me in terms that drew a linguistic distinction between me and “feminists” on multiple occasions

I recall differently. For instance: “Here we have an instance of Azkyroth treating the purveyors of other feminisms as not just incorrect, but as bad and broken people, whose ideas can be dismissed just as easily as children’s ideas, supposed personal trauma having reduced their agency as adults.”

This is very clearly acknowledging your feminism. There is Azkyroth’s feminism, and there are other feminisms.

But it goes beyond the epithet of “anti-feminist,” and there’s nothing about my phrasing that would suggest it being confined to that, and you know it.

Yes, I know that you took my statement about how I judge claims of “X is a feminist”, rewrote my statement so that it implied a lower standard than it did, and then implied I should be using your lower standard when engaging you.

This was a strawman of my position, though I think it was lazy rather than deliberate.

You have repeatedly used language that attributes motives or beliefs to me (usually motives that could be reasonably characterized as “anti-feminist” whether or not that specific term was used),

That’s entirely possible. Well, I’m sorry about that. I was wrong to do so.

If you would agree that because various feminist ideas contradict each other about what’s bad for women it must logically follow that some feminist ideas are bad for women, then I think we can say fairly say this much: I think some of your feminist ideas are bad for women, you think some of my feminist ideas are bad for women, but this does not mean you or your motives or ideas are anti-feminist, just wrong. And perhaps you would afford me the same.

(and you pretty much admitted, upthread, that you’re looking to have the argument YOU want to have, not address what I actually write)

Okay, let’s stop here for a moment, because that’s exactly what I believe you’re doing. I’m certain I’m not doing this. You are attributing motives, etc. What have I said that you think is fair to reword in this way?

The fact that we have no vernacular words for such parts*, like “knee” or “elbow” or “neck”, forces us to use either euphemisms or technical terms. If one is referring to a general structure, “scrotum” and “vulva” seem fine enough. However, to refer to one’s own equipment with those words removes any of the connotations of comfort, interest, or ….I guess fun, …that we sometimes may wish to…you know. Convey.

Actually, there’s a lot of vernacular for the lady bits, AE. Maybe you don’t hang out with enough lesbians. ;) Thing is, when having a discussion like this one, it’s best to stick with vulva/vagina, penis, etc. I think the perception of vulva/vagina being clinical is simply due to lack of use. If people used it more, in an enthusiastic way, that might change.

A lot of the women I know do use vernacular for vagina in private settings. A problem with using such vernacular in a discussion like this is that some people (usually men) get a little too fixated on said vernacular and often think it invites the usage of vernacular like cunt. And there we come to another problem – a lot of the vernacular for vagina is also used to insult and demean.

For now, I think it’s best to get more people comfortable with using vulva/vagina and keep the vernacular for private moments.

I think that would require admitting that “the bad parts down there” can be discussed in polite conversation.

I like words that I think sound softer, but to one of my good friends that language is reserved for bedroom talk. So she talks about “banging” and “snatches,” which I find cringe-worthy. It’s a funny subject, and we’ve both lamented the lack of more neutral words.

Ok, I did a horrible job trying to state what I MEANT. I am sorry for my tired mind and my laziness in posting.

I have the decency to care and admit when I am wrong. I did not have the decency to not call names. Just because I do not make a good argument does not make me stupid. Calling others names does.

The immediate rash of insults I received was uncalled for. Although I might state something that you do not agree with or is not evidently clear does not mean that I am saying EXACTLY what the responders said about me.

I am a rookie blogger. I am trying to learn more. Calling someone stupid (like I have done) is childish. I admit when you ask a person the same question many times and you get the same result many times than perhaps you can call them stupid or at least think them that, but I had no chance to further explain myself or what I possibly meant before the school yard attack was leveled.

I did not come out and blatantly say “people should be punished for doing porn”. I don’t think that at all.

I am sorry for calling you a guy Aquaria. But that does not make me look stupid. Nor did I wish to get into a pissing match with anybody or call names. An appropriate response to a “stupid” blog should be to ask questions relating to their comments. I just wanted a chance to be involved in a topic. (once again that does not make a person stupid)

I try to just ask questions. If i make presumptions based on my questions than I should seek to improve on my comprehension which I am trying to do.

Aquaria, because of your insulting response you got under my skin. As I am sure happens to others from time to time, but it seemed to me that your post at 381 was way out of line.

I really think there is an irrational crowd here based on the language used to respond to my comments. I know some of my comments were questions and by asking questions I got some very interesting answers…most being insults. I still have yet to wonder how by asking a question one can assume they know my thoughts or me as a person.

Not everyone on this planet can be as smart as everyone else. But you know what? We can all try to improve. And no matter how stupid a person is if they seek to enlighten themselves than I believe they should be given a chance…at least a couple.

The debate I got here was insulting from the get go. I have read my comments and though I don’t particularly care for them or think they were perfectly suited for the discussion they were not blatantly rude IMO. And I still believe I had some good questions.

I asked a lot of questions. To which I got many opinions based on what people thought of them. They were not perfect and I applaud you folks for your attention to the details, but to ridicule others for their accusatory tone and conclusions right away is a childish or at least not professional conduct. At least ask wtf I mean before you assume it. My stupid, mornonic, living in the past…etc…etc..etc. arse will try better in the future.

Just try to be a little human in the future and realize that though I may not be as smart as others, I am here in good spirits with good investigating being my goal.

It felt like I was in highschool again. Being that I should just go kill myself because I am so stupid rather than asking me to defend anything I stated. Which percentage wise is clearly what happened.

I learned a lesson. Hopefully I have become less stupid, but as many have pointed out, probably not. As some pointed out through their cruelty with words at me who deemed my ENTIRE LIFE as inferior…that will probably never happen.

I am just saying Aquaria, that your post was not professional. Had you asked me to explain what I meant (because I am a moron) and then berated me would have been more professional. And you being superior I think you would have understood that.

And by the way, there is a picture or something in your posts. I just was not sure if it was a picture of you or not. It is not my fault my stupid mind cannot figure out if you are a woman or a man. Since the picture means nothing.

Just for the record, because this is the type of person I am:

I am sorry if I offended anybody. And I truly apologize for the name calling. It is below me and I do not think it has a place in this arena. More importantly I apologize for only proof reading my comments twice and under a tired mind.

Porn is not perfectly healthy for everyone is the point I wished to state in the beginning, and that is only an opinion based on stories, 1st hand awareness of events, and media news wise.

Coincidentally I carry a 3.9 gpa after 110 credits, am an agnostic, have 1 child in advanced classes and have never been an aggressor of violence. DO THOSE THINGS MAKE ME NOT STUPID? CERTAINLY NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. But they show that I do care and I do try and that is the sole purpose I mention it.

Just to re-itterate…that last paragraph, I did not say that makes me smart or not stupid. I SAID IT SHOWS I TRY. Once again I am not bragging (far from it obviously especially here) I am showing that I try in Life is all. I wish to better myself is all.

For those who were once involved in porn in someway or possibly still are like Greta Christina and the woman mentioned above in the UK, I wish them well and personally do not judge them or anybody else for having consensual sex with other adults, videotaped or not. I am not THAT stupid.

Hell, I might even vote for them JUST BECAUSE of the negative light people choose to view them in. If they were not the best people for the job, well, it would be stupid to vote for them. But sometimes being stupid just seems more like the right thing to do than being rational.

Nope, you’re still apparently quite self-pitying, and you give the appearance of having a very limited intelligence. In other words, you appear stupid.

It’s not childish to label a stupid person as stupid, it’s accurate. If you don’t like it then go hang out with some stupid people; they won’t be able to tell how limited you are. Perhaps they’ll even be impressed by your GPA.

You weren’t really insulted, not by Pharyngula standards. Here’s your pearls, and the fainting couch is behind you. Make use of it tone troll.

Calling someone stupid (like I have done) is childish.

Sorry, we call them as we see them. If you sound stupid, we will say so. Here’s something you need to consider. Your own blog you can run as pristine, prudish and polite as you want. PZ wants us to be lewd, rewd and crewd. It drives off tone trolls who have nothing to say, but take forever to say it.

Coincidentally I carry a 3.9 gpa after 110 credits, am an agnostic, have 1 child in advanced classes and have never been an aggressor of violence. DO THOSE THINGS MAKE ME NOT STUPID? CERTAINLY NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Whoopie shit!!!!as if we care about your whiny problems. And many of us have college degrees. So we aren’t impressed by your alleged (I haven’t seen a transcript) classtaking.

Not sorry enough, because you just decided to subject us all to more of your stupid, boring, inane crap. Stupid is stupid and around here, it gets called stupid.

I am a rookie blogger.

What you’re doing here isn’t blogging. You’re posting on a blog, specifically, Pharyngula. If you have a blog, I suggest going there and staying there.

Coincidentally I carry a 3.9 gpa after 110 credits, am an agnostic, have 1 child in advanced classes and have never been an aggressor of violence.

That’s a coincidence? Really? Do you have any fucking idea at all of what you’re trying to say?

Cupcake, no one cares about your GPA, your IQ, your breeding status or anything else. It’s utterly irrelevant. Regardless of that not-so-dazzling GPA, you don’t display much intelligence and you certainly cannot communicate well at all. So it seems you didn’t do much with that schooling you’re bragging on.

DO THOSE THINGS MAKE ME NOT STUPID? CERTAINLY NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Well, you got one thing right. Anyone who uses all caps and multiple punctuation marks of any kind is basically screaming “Look, I’m an idiot!” so you might want to avoid that sort of thing.

But they show that I do care and I do try

No they don’t. Those things have absolutely nothing to do with care or effort and have nothing to say at all about what you care about or what you put effort into.

and that is the sole purpose I mention it.

Nope. That’s a blatant lie. It’s one we see here all the time, so don’t bother protesting. You wanted to impress people with your “smartness” because having your stupidity pointed out stung. Intellectual dishonesty isn’t gonna help your case.

Tethys 527: I addressed that in my first comment here. I explained there why I think it’s objectifying regardless of the content :-)

Actually you don’t even have to go to another of my comments. That sentence you quoted is literally surrounded by my reasons for why I think that. I wrote,

“There’s no interaction in porn, no communication; instead of making it, you’re having delivered to you, like a thing. That’s what makes it weird even if the act filmed was realistic and not degrading. For this reason I think porn as a concept is inherently objectifying even in the few cases where the actual contents are not degrading (since the people involved become means to deliver sex to the viewer)”

You can insult me but while you’re at it, couldn’t you address my reasons too? :)

Here is the qualifier:
– “even in the few cases where the actual contents are not degrading” (<– That includes all kinds of porn. My argument doesn't rely on the specific content you get to see in the film. I'm not only against some particular instances of porn; I'm against the idea of porn.)

And here's the argument:
– "instead of making it, you’re having delivered to you, like a thing." What's supposed to be a personal relationship (sex) between people becomes a thing (porn) to be submitted, rented, sold, bought; which reduces the participants to sex object status. Now I'm just repeating what I already wrote in my first comment here: “The problem to me is that the people you watch have the status of sex objects rather than people, because they’re there just as the means for the film to deliver sex to you. (I think we should all agree that actually having sex with someone is different, as the other one isn’t just a means for you to get something; there’s interaction, some connection.)”

The only one who tried to address an argument made an analogy with dancing. He told me, dancing with your partner is supposed to be something personal too, yet we see dancing DVDs for sale all the time and you don’t have a problem with that, so you’re incoherent. I think the analogy isn’t valid because dancing DVDs don’t feature couples pretending to be enjoying themselves so you can fantasize about it. They are either dancing lessons (comercial rather than personal relationship. I hope noone will respond to me saying porn is educational! :-D), a filmed competition (no need for viewers at all, the competition itself is the goal), or a show in a theatre (art). None of those are personal relationships like sex is. I think dancing DVDs are more similar by nature to a music concert or a film (if anything, a film with a sex scene, which is different from a pornographic film).

Coincidentally I carry a 3.9 gpa after 110 credits, am an agnostic, have 1 child in advanced classes and have never been an aggressor of violence. DO THOSE THINGS MAKE ME NOT STUPID? CERTAINLY NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

“Whoopie shit!!!!as if we care about your whiny problems. And many of us have college degrees. So we aren’t impressed by your alleged (I haven’t seen a transcript) classtaking”
____
I hope you noticed the big 2 big NOT’s in the last sentence.
I also stated directly after that sentence you cut out:

“Coincidentally I carry a 3.9 gpa after 110 credits, am an agnostic, have 1 child in advanced classes and have never been an aggressor of violence. DO THOSE THINGS MAKE ME NOT STUPID? CERTAINLY NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. But they show that I do care and I do try and that is the sole purpose I mention it.

Just to re-itterate…that last paragraph, I did not say that makes me smart or not stupid.I SAID IT SHOWS I TRY.

And it was far from an attempt to brag (especially here, as I stated)or impress anyone. I SAID IT SHOWS I TRY. Once again I am not bragging (far from it obviously especially here) I am showing that I try in Life is all. I wish to better myself is all. BTW, you say many of you have college degrees…well I don’t see your transcript’s either, but in good faith and using some common sense based on what most folks write, yes I would agree, many probably do have college degrees.

As I believe I clearly stated that I was not trying to impress anybody, nor as accused was I trying to make anyone care about my whiny problems. I stated that because I was using it as an example that I care about not being an ignorant fool. I REPEAT. I SAID IT SHOWS I TRY. I cannot prove to you my Son or my grades exist unless you give me an email address, however I would hope that by my most recent post it signifies that I am trying and I do care about being a rational human.

Once again WHOOPIE SHIT, as you said is the exact response which is childish. I tried to bring a little perspective is all on why I am so stupid but who I strive to be.

I don’t even know what a troll is in the blogging tense. I thought it was when someone dropped by, picked one sentence out of a paragraph and proceeded to be lewd about it and never came back.

I offer an explanation of my stupidity and you say I was not insulted by Pharyngula standards. I was called a lot of names, whether they were warranted is an important point, regardless though how is that not being insulted?

Sorry my tone changed,but I am not a troll. I just think I have done way to much damage in this post to ever redeem a quality of good conversation. I am not tired nor in a great amount of distracting pain as I was yesterday, and once again I apologize. But can no one accept an apology? I mean its not like I am the Catholic Church apologizing to Galileo 300 years after the fact. It is an apology and grown adults where I am from accept apologies when people admit that they were wrong in sincere fashion.

Does PZ recommend not accepting apologies when people admit their mistakes as well?

Sally Strange, OM
________________________________________________________
I stated I was not trying to impress anybody. Merely show I care about learning. I have no agenda other to engage in discussion. Rational and truth seeking.

Has either of you ever been wrong or deemed stupid by somebody at sometime? We should always be careful to judge. I learned that lesson yesterday again.

You still display childish behavior in your response. I don’t think post 548 deserves your childish response. I am merely trying to understand the rules of debate as they pertain to blogging. I am not some banshee waiting to fry the server or conduct an attack. As I mentioned, that I was wrong and will try harder to be more intelligent in my writing (despite being called a rash of names for the first time in a long time).

I extend my apologies and you call me stupid. That is sad.

I did ask that all my statements be retracted so that I could start over and well…I know that is stupid and entirely my fault, but can you not tell the difference between someone who is giving an honest effort and someone who is called a troll?

Can you really not discern the difference?
Do you have no empathy for those who are not as intellectual as yourself?
Can you not help one see the error of their ways?

I know its a blog and you cant save stupid, but you could at least try being humane within your comments to someone who tries.
We are not all evolutionarily as advanced at others. Should I throw myself off a bridge because of it, or just stop blogging.

Consequently I don’t want to blog where stupid people hang out. That would make me more stupid. I am just trying that’s all. I would not be typing this if I did not care. I even agree with PZ’s original opinion. That people should not be judged based on being in porn. And you still call me stupid? Have some decency please.

As there is clearly no way of being received here as an apologetic person who seeks to improve. I will try harder, and give more thought and more effort in the future. All I ask is a fair shake in the future based on my comments.

Which I am sure is what everyone of meaningful stature does here in the first place.

____________________________________________________
Also, if somebody can point me where or how to use better formatting it would be appreciated. Since my injury I have taken up trying to become a blogger. I am in no ways an expert and I do not wish to make long blogs unless I have something good to say. In the future my comments will probably be limited to short sentences, I do not want to offend people and evidently it is very hard for me to type something that is precisely correct based upon evidence. Noted. Duly Noted.

Here’s a clue if you really want to blog. I, and many first timers to your blog, will read by rule of three. You have three sentences to capture my attention, then three paragraphs. You have failed that with every inane post, which means you aren’t focusing. Also, you aren’t the smartest person here, so quit trying so hard to fit in.

I don’t even know what a troll is in the blogging tense.

A troll is someone who posts on a blog, not to join the discussion, but to disrupt it. It can take various forms. Here at Pharyngula, a tone troll, someone who is interested more in how something is said rather than the intellectual content of what is being said, is looked at like doggie doo on your shoes. Loose all complaints about tone while you are here, as “house rules” goes against your stance. You just come off looking sad. Run your own blog however you want.

If you have something to say, try this simple formula: “This is what I believe, and this is the evidence (link) to back it up”. Also, at first, stick to one idea. I think porn XSSSSS, and this is why. Too many ideas expressed in an incoherent teal deer (tl;dr, too long, didn’t read) manner doesn’t help your cause.

*sigh* Infinite, since I’m not a member of the Horde, maybe it’ll help if you hear a little from me?

Your communication skills are horrible. Take that as an honest assessment, but if you take it as an insult, well, try to at least see the point. Let me give examples:

Why havent all humans engaged in sexual pleasure so others can watch for the past million years?

That’s from your first post, I’m sure you recognize it. Later you said

I said Why haven’t all humans engaged in sexual pleasure so other can watch for the past million years?

You say “Why shouldn’t people who like having sex in front of others do so in front of people who like watching them? “

WTF does what you said have to do with what I said. I asked a question. Has porn existed for millions of years? That’s it. I asked a question and you assume I am saying people shouldn’t do porn. I never said that.

“Has porn existed for millions of years?” is NOT the same question at all. Starting your original question with “Why haven’t . . .” has clear assumptions on the questioner’s part (that’s you) built into it: that people haven’t been having sex in front of others for the past “million years.” If you do not, or did not, have that assumption, then you should not have used that phrasing. You should have thought about what you were saying, and why. Which brings me to

As humans are we better off savagely expressing our sexual desires for pleasure and pleasure alone?

You objected to people jumping on you for using the word “savage.” Well, they should. “Savage” has particular connotations associated with it: primitive, unruly, uncivilized, in need of taming and controlling. Think of Europeans and colonists calling Native Americans “savages.” Even the “noble savage” has hints of arrogance and smugness to it. If that is not the way you wanted to be read, then you should have thought far more carefully about what you wrote. If it helps, think of it like those forms of poetry that limit the lines and syllables available to you, forcing you to choose each word with exacting precision, taking into account the precise meaning and connotation you’re looking to express. Haiku, perhaps, or a sonnet.

Speaking of, you ramble. A lot. And you repeat yourself. A lot. I’m long winded, but damn, I really hope I’m not that bad. Work on it, and you’ll be easier to read, and to understand. Also, edit.

To your protesting about trying: great. Try all you like, that’s good. But complaining that people shouldn’t be taking you to task when you don’t succeed, just because you try? Don’t. It can only come across as whining. If you want respect, improve. Earn the respect, don’t just ask for it. No one is obligated to give you respect until you’ve earned it, and around here? They probably won’t. Don’t tell us your GPA, but rather demonstrate your ability.

And quit whining about being insulted, or called stupid. Insults are encouraged around here. Expect it, and if don’t like being insulted, don’t earn it. There are plenty of places where it won’t be common. Greta Christina’s blog has a policy about insulting, and she’s been discussing porn as well. Of course, you still need to earn your respect.

One last thing: the pedophile porn? There’s no reason to belief the increase in adult porn is somehow causing child porn. The more likely scenario is that the increase is caused by the same thing: that it’s just flat out cheaper and easier to make porn than ever before. In fact, I have all the equipment I would need in my house already, and only lack willing participants. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if you had all the equipment you would need as well. In other words, you’re mistaking correlation for causation.

NathanDST, your post was fine. Good, too. As for Infinitewhatever’s insistence on connecting adult porn to child porn, well, it’s a fine example of stupidity. Those who are wired to be attracted to children have no interest in adult porn.

Pedophiles, hebephiles and ephebophiles have been around since there have been humans. Trade in child porn has been going on just as long. Perceptions of an increase have to do with a much larger population and moving into the digital age.

“One last thing: the pedophile porn? There’s no reason to belief the increase in adult porn is somehow causing child porn. The more likely scenario is that the increase is caused by the same thing: that it’s just flat out cheaper and easier to make porn than ever before. In fact, I have all the equipment I would need in my house already, and only lack willing participants. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if you had all the equipment you would need as well. In other words, you’re mistaking correlation for causation”

That accusation I make about the growth of porn influencing the growth of illegal porn is probably not either provable or not provable. After all, we would need all the documentation of (what is now in this age in America at least )illegal porn vs legal porn to either prove or disprove my hypothetical point. And thus I cannot proceed in an argument that lacks empirical evidence without it just being. . . well, stupid/opinion :)

You yourself said:

“The more likely scenario…”

There is just not a lot of evidence either way. But I do agree with you with no doubts that the increase of technology can and does influence the rise of such atrocious activity, as you suggested would be the more likely cause.

Simply my question is:

Should the argument nonetheless be addressed if one is discussing the negative judgmental nature held by some against people involved in pornography?

Because there is a history of illegal porn

(and perhaps for this argument or any we should not even call it illegal porn as Sally Strange,OM mentioned similarly in a different post (“This is why I hate college football programs”) we should call it exactly what it is Sexual Assault of Children or Rape, not just illegal porn or molestation as was the case in the Penn State post),

because there is a history of Rape being sold as porn I would argue that this is why many many folks violently disagree and condemn people who are in the porn industry. Despite the fact that most porn is consensual.

That is sad, and perhaps does not answer the question the original post asks (and is maybe off thread or off topic), but it possibly explains one aspect of why such a large percent of the population views porn as an evil enterprise and damns those who are in it, because they associate criminal activity; drug abuse, rape etc. with porn. An old adage of one rotten apple spoiling the bushel. I only offer this as an explanation of why people frown on people who do porn. And evidently they do.

My apologies to those who have already covered this. I still have not read all the comments and am just trying to respond to criticism and critique’s of which I have so rightfully incurred upon myself. I still have yet to make a point maybe. Well, Rome was not built in a day, obviously neither is my blogging career.

usually motives that could be reasonably characterized as “anti-feminist” whether or not that specific term was used

I guess I’ve been arguing that what passes in your opinion for reasonable characterization as antifeminist frequently includes some things which are not antifeminist, and you are wrong, unreasonable and possibly failing basic to intermediate logic when you term it such. So I thought I’d better take some time to investigate whether accepting your characterization would mean contradicting my earlier argument about what constitutes antifeminism.

As you know I have quite a good memory for my own arguments. I must regrettably report I’ve spent some time rereading and I’m afraid nothing I remember saying to you can be characterized that way. I looked up the harshest stuff I could remember and still agreed with it but it had naught to do with your feminism.

However, this is not to say that your feelings are not what you feel. My sentiment was alongside what I’m capable of modeling as your limbic system and I surmise that I must surely have criticized you about feminism in a way that you found hurtful. I find that regrettable. I shall attempt to validate your feminism when hounding you in the future. And it is also possible that you remember something I don’t, which totally was reasonably characterized as calling you anti-feminist, although at this point I can no longer honestly say I consider it likely. Perhaps you have some memory of specific words that would aid in googling.

I suspect this qualifies as apologizing reservedly, so I’m also sorry for misleading you about that. This comment is indecent of me.

I am sorry for not speaking more precisely. My intentions were not to connect the 2 in either way. My intentions were to possibly explain one reason WHY people show such bias against people creating porn.

PZ asked:

“I’m curious: can anyone give a good rational reason why performing in pornography should diminish one’s credibility in the public eye?”

Although the existent of rape and pedophiles in the porn industry cannot be empirically defined , I merely offered it as a reason why some people diminish the credibility of those who perfom pornography.

While this is not a good rational reason why people stunt the credibility of others in the porn industry, it does offer an explanation of why. And lets face it, most of those who judge so harshly probably are not doing so for good rational reasons.

I suspect the answer to PZ’s question is:
No, there is no good rational reason.

Also, if somebody can point me where or how to use better formatting it would be appreciated.

That is what I see on my screen, ooops, it shows it correctly with out the words blockquote in there.Nice. So the greater than less than signs must be telling the computer what to do. Is there manual for this?

ad hominum salvator ॐ says:

Then use the Preview button to make sure you’ve got it right.

wow you actually have to type the less than sign and then blockquote and then greater than sign. I think I got it.

You have to be sure to insert the / though at the end of their quote otherwise it continues the indentation in the preview right? That is so cool, thank you for teaching the village idiot.

Perhaps someday a greater idiot will come along and I can be known as the former village idiot. Or once the village idiot always the village idiot? Please don’t answer that.

Although the existent of rape and pedophiles in the porn industry cannot be empirically defined , I merely offered it as a reason why some people diminish the credibility of those who perfom pornography.

While this is not a good rational reason why people stunt the credibility of others in the porn industry, it does offer an explanation of why. And lets face it, most of those who judge so harshly probably are not doing so for good rational reasons.

Actually, suspecting participation in non-consensual sex acts, including sexual assault and rape of children, would be a RATIONAL reason to regard participation in porn as diminishing someone’s credibility, IF one had evidence that this is so very widespread that it’s well-nigh impossible to be a performer and not encounter people who exploit and damage other people, children especially.

I suspect that the far more common reason for regarding porn performers as morally suspect and with little credibility is more along the lines of, “Ew sex is dirty and icky and sinful, I know it because Jesus told me so.”

Frankly, if people who hold the latter view would get their heads on straight and stop thinking of sex as something that is intrinsically morally dangerous, I believe that the chance of pornography using exploitation and sexual violence as a staple would be greatly diminished. After all, by labeling people who participate in sex outside the narrow confines of Christian morality as degenerate, immoral, damaged, or dirty, there is an implicit belief that these people are thus worth less, and thus the first step towards dehumanizing them is taken. Dehumanization is, of course, the necessary prerequisite to hurting someone.

So no, I really doubt that the major driving force behind the irrational disapproval of porn performers is driven by moral concern about sexual exploitation, sexual assault, and rape in the porn industry. Would that it were.

I can sort of think of one reason why porn decreases credibility for a person, stereotypical as it is. Porn (and prostitution, for that matter) requires no skill, at least for women. ANYONE can do porn, or be a prostitute. Now, can anyone be a GOOD pornstar? No, and I’ve certainly seen some pornstars and heard of some prostitutes that are actually really smart with how they conduct their business, or whom I would definitely call talented and skilled. But to just be a porn star, or just go out and start hooking, all you need at the bare minimum is a decent body- face is even negligible, so if you can pop enough diet pills you’re golden. That is something that any person can do.

Therefore it’s very easy to come to the conclusion that somebody works in sex because they’re a failure in every other subject of their life. This is also where the lack of self respect comes in, because it is easy to conclude that these porn stars have disrespected their minds and their talents to do something that requires neither.

So now we have the idea that sex workers have no self respect. While I don’t agree with that notion for all people who do porn, there is logic behind it and it could be considered rational.

Past that, sometimes we get so caught up in stereotypes that we forget that stereotyping is meant to be a generalization, and isn’t a steadfast rule. It’s infinitely easier to paint everyone with one brush even when someone clearly is different- we’d have to buy different paint and smaller brushes, and the alternative is cheaper.

Reading this, and the link provided, I was struck by the lack of rational reasons for the parents' anger at Sasha Grey reading to their children. Of course I found none. I listened to the interview with Glen Walker, and no one gave a rational reason why Sasha Grey should not have read to elementary school students.

Moreover, at the end of the clip, I marveled-in a bad way-how KTLA hyped this situation up. The station should be ashamed of itself. There were exactly 3 people interviewed in the clip. Of those 3, only 2 were stated to be parents. The title of their article leads one to believe that many parents were interviewed. If they were, KTLA didn't show them. The use of the word "outraged" is ridiculous hyperbole. The three people interviewed didn't seem outraged. Irritated, annoyed or perturbed, maybe. But outraged? Not so much.

I also love how KTLA was so fair and balanced. They didn't touch upon the positive idea of someone reading to elementary school students. They sure did mention porn a lot though.

<I can sort of think of one reason why porn decreases credibility for a person, stereotypical as it is. Porn (and prostitution, for that matter) requires no skill, at least for women. <

–Blanket generalization #3452. Given this assertion, I would guess you've met the vast majority of female porn stars, and found support for this, right? I'm sure you've done extensive travelling and spent much time with prostitutes so you have first hand experience that their jobs require no skill.
Also, the flip side of your "reason"implies that porn and prostitution require skill from men.
Porn=no skill for women
Porn=skill for men.
I haven't encountered such blatant sexism in a while (and for the benefit of those that might not know what sexism is: discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; especially, such discrimination directed against women; http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sexism)